Subject: Clarification, was: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 3/27/2004 9:31 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:



Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:


Len Over 21 wrote:


Plonk

Finally! Thank you!


I though you plonked me, kind sir?

You expected him to acutally DO what he said?

The 'old timers' here are still waiting for him to get his "Extra Lite out
of the box".

The box has been open for three years now.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/27/2004 9:39 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/26/2004 9:29 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Arnie Macy" wrote ...

What "interpretation" did YOU make, Brain?

I put interpretation in "" because it is a literal reading of the
rules. Everyone else who has taken me to task calls it an
interpretation.

I have no "task" to take you to over Part 97 rules.

They are pretty clear. Not a whole lot of "interpretation" required
there. You either do (or don't do, as may be the case) what they say, or be
held liable for fines.

The FCC itself has issued several "clarifications" on these very
specific
topoics that you've cited here. What interpretation was left to be made?

You must post those at once or you are a liar. You have 12 hours to
do so.

I didn't post them in the first place, Brain.

They were not assertions of mine.

There ARE public resources to validate the FCC previous "positions" on
rulings. I suggest that you use them.

On the otherhand, YOU are the ONLY person who can "validate" assertions
YOU make. And "we" are still waiting for you to answer the question "What
"major role" in "emergency comms" do unlicensed radio services play...???

2. Administering a Farnsworth exam when Part 97 clearly states "Morse
Code."

There is no such thing as a "Farnsworth" exam, Brain.

Then no dash-dot exams have been given by the ARRL VEC since 1988.

Which is it? Has the ARRL given dash-dot exams or haven't they?

Huh? Huh?? Huh???

The VEC's have not administred any "dot-dash" exams, either.

They have, however, administered thousands of Element 1 Morse Code tests.

These tests were administered in accordance with FCC parameters and
approval.

UNLESS, of course, you can provide some reference to some FCC rule or
regulation that mandates a "Farnsworth" test or a "dot-dash" test...?!?!

I don't make the rules, and I don't take it upon myself to interpret
workarounds to what Part 97 states.

What "workarounds"...?!?! The FCC had already "interpreted" the
specific
items you've mentioned in this post, Brain.

Then it is imperative that you post such documents.

Which documents would you like posted, Brain? A simple Google search for
"Part 97" or "Amateur Radio Rules" will deliver tons of links to FCC comments
on the topic, and since they will come from a third party, it will deny you or
Lennie the opportunity to claim I either "editied" the find or drew solely upon
ARRL resources to provide them.

Or are you simply voicing your disagreement with thier position on
those
specifics?

Their position is stated in Part 97. Even though you think it may
take many libraries to hold all of the content of Part 97, you might
try embarking on such a reading journey. It might take you the
remainder of your natural life to get through it all, but it is worth
the effort.

The FCC has issued many "interpretations" on "pecuniary interest" since I
was first licensed in 1972, from "absolutely not", to "It's OK under these
restrictions..."

Do you REALLY need over 30 years of FCC comments to wade through?

You can't even handle ONE question asked of you in the last hour...How are
you going to proceess THAT amount of data...?!?!

Hey, I managed to get through it, and so can you.

I have noting to "get through", Brain...I just don't use Amateur Radio to
make ANY business related communicaitons. Period. What anyone else does is at
the peril of THIER license, not mine.

I leave that sort of work to the experts on RRAP and the FCC.

The "experts" in RRAP are one thing....

Correct. They are one thing, one mind, lock step.

If you think that, you've not been paying attention.

That you and I are at odds is living proof of that.

The FCC staffers, on the otherhand, ARE the "experts". Even your
"mentor" says so. Do you disagree?

SORRY to BUST YOUR RANT!!!

That is why I deferred to their document when Arnie asked me to
provide a workaround to the monetary rule. I cannot do so.

What "rant", Brainless One?

Do you disagree that the FCC staffers are the defacto "experts" on radio
regulations?

Yes or no.

Brain, it's obvious that getting your nose rubbed in your own newsgroup
excrement is beginning to cause you to act in an unstable manner.

I am sorry that you find it offensive that you are being required to take
responsiblity for your own actions, but most of us ARE required to do that...or
at least expected to...

That you were not rasied that way is not my problem. But you are over 18
now and it IS expected of you.

That you are incapable is obvious.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/27/2004 9:40 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/25/2004 6:07 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/24/2004 5:26 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Fair enough.

It only took you three days.

Steve, K4YZ

Is there now a time limit on replying?

Oh no, Brain...You go right on spinning your spin and dancing your
dance.

I'll keep pointing out how silly you look going around in circles.

Steve, K4YZ

You keep making yourself look silly, and nuts.

And I will keep on making you look like a liar.

Now...WHAT "major role" do teh "unlicensed services" play in "emergency
comms"...??

Do I need to RE-quote the post that you stated that this is so?

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/27/2004 9:43 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/25/2004 6:02 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Poor, Steve. The RRAP Bully now thinks he's being picked on and
suckered into looking foolish and behaving badly. It's just so very
unfair.

I am neither bullying you nor am being "suckered" into anything.

I am showing you to be the liar that I have claimed you to be.

Sorry that you can't see that. It IS rather obvious.

Steve, K4YZ

"William" wrote in message
m...

Then no dash-dot exams have been given by the ARRL VEC since 1988.

Which is it? Has the ARRL given dash-dot exams or haven't they?

Huh? Huh?? Huh???


What the HECK is a dash-dot exam?? They have NEVER given dash-dot exams.
They've only given Morse code receiving and/or sending exams as far as I am
aware of. Since it is far easier to copy using Farnsworth spacing at 5wpm
than other spacing methods, that is what they use.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

I though you plonked me, kind sir?

You expected him to acutally DO what he said?

Hope springs eternal.

The 'old timers' here are still waiting for him to get his "Extra Lite
out of the box".

The box has been open for three years now.

Four years, two months and eight days as of today, actually.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(William) writes:

Poor, Steve. The RRAP Bully now thinks he's being picked on and
suckered into looking foolish and behaving badly. It's just so very
unfair.

Isn't it awful? Gosh, he ought to contact the other Steve, Colonel
Austin (the one with the bionic VTC), and, with the aid of a ham
in Iowa, they can straighten all this out to assure their amateur
god-hood.

LHA / WMD

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Plonk

Finally! Thank you!

I though you plonked me, kind sir?

Not in the browser settings here...:-)

A "Plink" restores everything. It's what is done with 22s. :-)

Besides, the gunnery nurse keeps hollering "HE LIES, HE LIES!"

Feels like kindly magnanimity to fabricate a situation where it
is true! :-)

Just think, "true lies." Could be a great motion picture title!

Plank

LHA / WMD

Subject: Clarification, was: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 3/27/2004 12:59 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

I though you plonked me, kind sir?

You expected him to acutally DO what he said?

Hope springs eternal.

The 'old timers' here are still waiting for him to get his "Extra Lite
out of the box".

The box has been open for three years now.

Four years, two months and eight days as of today, actually.


Oooooops...so it is.

I stand corrected. Time flies while having fun.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(William) writes:

Poor, Steve. The RRAP Bully now thinks he's being picked on and
suckered into looking foolish and behaving badly. It's just so very
unfair.

Isn't it awful? Gosh, he ought to contact the other Steve, Colonel
Austin (the one with the bionic VTC), and, with the aid of a ham
in Iowa, they can straighten all this out to assure their amateur
god-hood.

LHA / WMD

I don't know if Lee Majors can behave that badly, even if he's just
acting.

About the other one, I have no doubt.

Maybe they can do something with the "Good Cop, Bad Cop" routine, but
with ham radio instead of police work.

Rumor has it that it will premiere on the Garden Channel as
"Lawn Order, SVU (Special VTC Unit)." Variety and Hollywood
Reporter newspapers aren't talking...it might be a "Shield" spin-
off with the gunnery nurse as another Mackey (they are waiting
for the hair loss to be complete).

I'll ask around...

LHA / WMD

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

Besides, the gunnery nurse keeps hollering "HE LIES, HE LIES!"

He's nuts. Pay no attention.

I don't...but it's like QRM, there, noisy, with no intelligence content
and it distracts from real discussions. :-)

LHA / WMD

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

Sheesh, Leonard. We don't use much in the way of milspec electronics
anymore. The new theory adopted by the armed services in 1994 relies
heavily on commercially available gear.

Are you sleeping on your COTS?

The day of everything having to be milspec is long gone.

Bravo Sierra. Those are still here. So are Military
Specifications,
abbreviated "Mil Spec" among those of us who still have to use
them.

The Bravo Sierra is yours, Leonard. Since you don't actually work with
the
military anymore, you are forced to search things out on the net and hope
they are up to date.

Actually, I'm working for a company that is contracting to another
company who has a contract to supply electronics for the DoD.
Not full time. But the MIL STDs of many kinds are in both places
with many different dash number "Mil Specs" called out.


Then you should know that if the product (or service) cannot be obtained
commercially, even the components should be commercial or adapted for
military use. As you know, many "commercial" products already meet or
exceed what we would commonly refer to as Milspec.

Note: "Mil Specs" is an old term for MILITARY STANDARDS of
many kinds, informal. They have all sorts of effective dates to
them but I'm trusting another to keep them all current and also do
all the bookkeeping on checking document call-outs, to see we
all have the standard specified on-hand.

OTOH, I work IN the system and understand how it
ACTUALLY is quite well.

Okay, tell us which ring at the Pentagon your office is located and
I may get a chance to look you up...

I quoted from the FAR and you still sit there and
argue with me. What part of FACT don't you get?

My organization didn't get that particular document so I can't
verify it. :-)


The FAR is the Federal Aquisition Regulation (15 and 42) and the DFAR is the
defense version. If you are a contractor and or sub-contractor on a
government contract, you are required to be familiar with it. Seriously,
you might want to tell your employer to supply you a copy since you and I
both are bound by what it says.

I'm sure that you need only imply you always tell the truth
in here and that is the Final Word. :-)

Do you know what COTS is? Ask around. Don't sleep on the job.

COTS = Commercial Off The Shelf.

I'm quite familiar with the term COTS. I didn't respond because it was a
moronic question to ask someone who works in the system.

Been around for over a decade now. It applies to specialized things
such as the three principal ICs found in the R/T for the AN/PRC-119.
ITT and GD make a quarter million of those sets between 1989 and
2003. It's the standard small-unit (battalion and down) radio for U.S.
military land forces.


COR on a 6 million dollar contract.

Wow, the "Six Million Dollar Ham!" "...We have the technology, we
can rebuild Arnie..." Cut to promo, voice-over "Coming to your
favorite channel any day now...!", up exciting music bkgd, take
title...

Say what you want, but I have the EXPERIENCE with the contract and KNOW
what
I'm talking about. All you have is an internet search tool, and "Old"
knowledge concerning how the aquisition system works.

Righto, Col. Steve Austin, your bionics make you superior everywhere.

"Millions" in contract awards have been awarded since WW2. The
dollar amounts, normalized for the COLA, serve only to indicate the
size of a particular project. That's a manager and bean-counter
thing; us folks with the dirtier hands concentrate on the works of a
project in order to fulfill a contract.

And as the COR, I make sure that you do.

The COR (Contract Officer Representative or COTR (technical added)) IS the
person in the weeds, Leonard. We surveille, inspect, rate, and coordinate
with the contractor concerning every aspect of the contract for the CO. The
6 million dollar contract (for which I am still the COR) extends over a
period of 2 years. We are only 3 months into it at this point, and have
just completed our first quarterly performance rating for them. They did
quite well.


New stuff, Leonard. Doesn't even remotely resemble what you did in 1955.
I
gave you the web site to research. What, did the BIG words stump you?

"BIG" is also an acronym now? [what will they think of next?]

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious? Antidisestablishmentarianism?

I'm working with HEMT, PHEMT, and GaSP devices. For radio
purposes...and some of that will bleed over to WiFax, one of the
IEEE 802 standard systems for broadband (it ain't "Wi-Fi" but one
of the families within the standard). DoD will own the plans per
terms of the overall contract, but the techniques and notebook
data aren't owned by da gubmint.

I bet you a dollar to a donut that the military specific application of that
technology is quite proprietary.

Now you shoulder your FAR away VTC and bravely defend the
Homeland Security by shouting and hollering your magnificence
in this newsgrope. That means all of us on the project can
finish and get final payment.

You don't have the brain power to have any ammo of consequence, Leonard.

Whatever you say, Steve Austin. :-)

You are the one with morse code expertise and the bionic VTC.

We will all sleep safely on our COTS at night knowing the USA is
guarded by such knowledgeable superiors.


Actually, yes you will.

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

Isn't it awful? Gosh, he ought to contact the other Steve, Colonel
Austin (the one with the bionic VTC), and, with the aid of a ham
in Iowa, they can straighten all this out to assure their amateur
god-hood.


I just have to laugh. This very same technology that you make fun of (I
presume because you don''t have a clue) is the same technology that might
very well save your butt some day.

Arnie -

Subject: Clarification, was: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 3/27/2004 11:45 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

Besides, the gunnery nurse keeps hollering "HE LIES, HE LIES!"

He's nuts. Pay no attention.

I don't...but it's like QRM, there, noisy, with no intelligence content
and it distracts from real discussions.

In the last four years, I have seen you post exactly THREE posts that I
would classify as "real discussions", Lennie. The last one being this past
week on the importance of filing comments with the FCC on BPL.

The rest are your ususal smatterings of rhetorical antagonism, spiced with
profanity and "personal perjorative".

Same Putzy Lennie...

Steve, K4YZ

ubject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: "Arnie Macy"
Date: 3/28/2004 2:25 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

Isn't it awful? Gosh, he ought to contact the other Steve, Colonel
Austin (the one with the bionic VTC), and, with the aid of a ham
in Iowa, they can straighten all this out to assure their amateur
god-hood.


I just have to laugh. This very same technology that you make fun of (I
presume because you don''t have a clue) is the same technology that might
very well save your butt some day.

Actually, I hope one of them has an AMI while I am near...Wouldn't THAT be
ironic!

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

Isn't it awful? Gosh, he ought to contact the other Steve, Colonel
Austin (the one with the bionic VTC), and, with the aid of a ham
in Iowa, they can straighten all this out to assure their amateur
god-hood.

I just have to laugh. This very same technology that you make fun of (I
presume because you don''t have a clue) is the same technology that might
very well save your butt some day.

Actually, it might. You get all those FAR and DFAR documents
together, epoxy them into nice walls (using COTS epoxy, of course)
and you will create a Maginot-style impregnable fortress to protect
everyone!

Yup, a VTC will allow the participants to TALK terrorists out of
attacking the USA again! Scare them witless with video bytes!
Posture, preen, show them who's Boss! Right on!

------

Now what has your ranting to say about the NCVEC petition
(RM-10870) and their proposed "Communicator" class license?

Hint...that's in the thread title and the subject of the thread
origin...

LHA / WMD

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

Sheesh, Leonard. We don't use much in the way of milspec electronics
anymore. The new theory adopted by the armed services in 1994 relies
heavily on commercially available gear.

Are you sleeping on your COTS?

The day of everything having to be milspec is long gone.

Bravo Sierra. Those are still here. So are Military
Specifications,
abbreviated "Mil Spec" among those of us who still have to use
them.

The Bravo Sierra is yours, Leonard. Since you don't actually work with
the
military anymore, you are forced to search things out on the net and hope
they are up to date.

Actually, I'm working for a company that is contracting to another
company who has a contract to supply electronics for the DoD.
Not full time. But the MIL STDs of many kinds are in both places
with many different dash number "Mil Specs" called out.

Then you should know that if the product (or service) cannot be obtained
commercially, even the components should be commercial or adapted for
military use.

So, if a product isn't available commercially, the commercial
product must be used anyway? :-)

Makes for very lightweight products. Those would have lots of
things not there. :-)

As you know, many "commercial" products already meet or
exceed what we would commonly refer to as Milspec.

They do? Gosh. All this time thousands of design engineers
have been "wrong" according to His Majesty with the bionic VTC!

Thanks for the heads-up.


The FAR is the Federal Aquisition Regulation (15 and 42) and the DFAR is the
defense version. If you are a contractor and or sub-contractor on a
government contract, you are required to be familiar with it.

I am? We are? I suppose. That's what the "bean-counters" are
for, Arnie. Not my area. I'm intimately into the product itself
and its very specific specifications. We are very familiar with
those specific specifications.

The managerial levels and the accountants can handle the
administrative details. Us design folk aren't required to be legal
beagles sniffing out things in the financial-contract half of an
award, just the engineering-contract part of it. [those specific
specifications mentioned]

Seriously,
you might want to tell your employer to supply you a copy since you and I
both are bound by what it says.

My contractor, not my "employer." There's a difference, but the
difference is a petty detail that you Pentagon lords of the Rings
don't bother with. :-)

I'm not worried about the contract administration tasks. So far,
to the best of my observation, no contract regulation has ever
been able to communicate by radio, search for a submarine, or
test out another electronic unit. Maybe you know of some
contract document that has?

I'm sure that you need only imply you always tell the truth
in here and that is the Final Word. :-)

Do you know what COTS is? Ask around. Don't sleep on the job.

COTS = Commercial Off The Shelf.

I'm quite familiar with the term COTS. I didn't respond because it was a
moronic question to ask someone who works in the system.

Riiiight. And all the contract administrators can "work on the board,"
do the designs, get their hands dirty in the labs, monitor the
environmental testing, troubleshoot failures, and, in general, make
the PRODUCT work. Suuuuure.

Just who do you think specifies whether or not a commercial, off
the shelf component will WORK in a PRODUCT? Here's a clue,
bionic one, it's NOT the contract administration side of a contract.


"Millions" in contract awards have been awarded since WW2. The
dollar amounts, normalized for the COLA, serve only to indicate the
size of a particular project. That's a manager and bean-counter
thing; us folks with the dirtier hands concentrate on the works of a
project in order to fulfill a contract.

And as the COR, I make sure that you do.

Not HERE, sweetie. Your name on the corporate visitor's list at
the lobby ain't there nor did security ever give you a pass for
visitor access.

The COR (Contract Officer Representative or COTR (technical added)) IS the
person in the weeds, Leonard. We surveille, inspect, rate, and coordinate
with the contractor concerning every aspect of the contract for the CO. The
6 million dollar contract (for which I am still the COR) extends over a
period of 2 years. We are only 3 months into it at this point, and have
just completed our first quarterly performance rating for them. They did
quite well.

Okay, I'll have my dentist erect a plaque with your name on it.

It would be fun to have you visit the main plant and watch you
"surveille" the work on the prototypes. I'll bet all your morse code
and amateur experience would make you very knowledgeable
about the work being "surveilled."

Oh, and leave the weeds at the entrance. There's lots of clean
rooms here and we can't allow dirt or vegetation into them.

New stuff, Leonard. Doesn't even remotely resemble what you did in 1955. I
gave you the web site to research. What, did the BIG words stump you?

"BIG" is also an acronym now? [what will they think of next?]

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious? Antidisestablishmentarianism?

I'm working with HEMT, PHEMT, and GaSP devices. For radio
purposes...and some of that will bleed over to WiFax, one of the
IEEE 802 standard systems for broadband (it ain't "Wi-Fi" but one
of the families within the standard). DoD will own the plans per
terms of the overall contract, but the techniques and notebook
data aren't owned by da gubmint.

I bet you a dollar to a donut that the military specific application of that
technology is quite proprietary.

"Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" is probably proprietary to Walt
Disney Productions. I don't know the details but the Disney
corporate buildings are at the corner of Verdugo and Buena Vista
in Burbank. "Antidisestablishmentarianism" is free for public
use, in some dictionaries. HEMT, PHEMT, and GaSP are
non-copyrighted process terms in the RF-electronics industry.

I'll meet you at the Krispy Kreme at the Empire Center in Burbank.
You bring the money, I'll bring the appetite.

--------

Now, how does your "COR" superiorness relate to the NCVEC
petition (RM-10870) and the term "Communicator" class of
amateur radio license? :-)

LHA / WMD

Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 3/28/2004 3:32 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

Isn't it awful? Gosh, he ought to contact the other Steve, Colonel
Austin (the one with the bionic VTC), and, with the aid of a ham
in Iowa, they can straighten all this out to assure their amateur
god-hood.

I just have to laugh. This very same technology that you make fun of (I
presume because you don''t have a clue) is the same technology that might
very well save your butt some day.

Actually, it might. You get all those FAR and DFAR documents
together, epoxy them into nice walls (using COTS epoxy, of course)
and you will create a Maginot-style impregnable fortress to protect
everyone!

Yup, a VTC will allow the participants to TALK terrorists out of
attacking the USA again! Scare them witless with video bytes!
Posture, preen, show them who's Boss! Right on!

------

Now what has your ranting to say about the NCVEC petition
(RM-10870) and their proposed "Communicator" class license?

Hint...that's in the thread title and the subject of the thread
origin...

Once thought to have Arnie's back against the wall, and therefore MORE
than willing to rant off-topic on his own, Lennie finds himself up against a
formidable and well prepared "opponent" and NOW wants to move back on target.

Uh huh.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 3/28/2004 3:32 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Now, how does your "COR" superiorness relate to the NCVEC
petition (RM-10870) and the term "Communicator" class of
amateur radio license?

I love seeing Lennie backed into corners.

Funny how being there suddenly makes him want to get "on topic", even
though only one day ago he was perfectly happy to ramble on about off-topic
stuff when he thought it was going to make him look "smart". Lennie went
one-acromym too far and found himself bested by a federal employee...Not even a
"radio engineer"...THAT had to hurt!

Sheeesh. What a creep.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Clarification, was: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/28/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

The rest are your ususal smatterings of rhetorical antagonism, spiced
with
profanity and "personal perjorative".

Same Putzy Lennie...

Steve, K4YZ


Didn't he help you find a schematic or a manual?

Sure he did. And Hitler got the trains running and revitalized a
devastated economy. The point being that even the worst scoundrels of
civilization can do SOMETHING right once in a while.

When he did those things, I said "Thanks, Len", and I meant it.

When he resorts to profanity and the usual misrepresentations about
Amateur Radio, it's "back to work""...

Steve, K4YZ

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

So, if a product isn't available commercially, the commercial
product must be used anyway? :-)

Makes for very lightweight products. Those would have lots of
things not there. :-)


The next step would be to modify a commercial product to meet the standard
or specification. If that is not possible, then R&D it and produce the
product through a specific contract with the developer.

As you know, many "commercial" products already meet or
exceed what we would commonly refer to as Milspec.

They do? Gosh. All this time thousands of design engineers
have been "wrong" according to His Majesty with the bionic VTC!

Thanks for the heads-up.


The FAR is the Federal Aquisition Regulation (15 and 42) and the DFAR is
the
defense version. If you are a contractor and or sub-contractor on a
government contract, you are required to be familiar with it.

I am? We are? I suppose. That's what the "bean-counters" are
for, Arnie. Not my area. I'm intimately into the product itself
and its very specific specifications. We are very familiar with
those specific specifications.

The managerial levels and the accountants can handle the
administrative details. Us design folk aren't required to be legal
beagles sniffing out things in the financial-contract half of an
award, just the engineering-contract part of it. [those specific
specifications mentioned]


You, as the "developer" of the product (as a sub-contractor) would not be
directly responsible, but the general contractor "is". Therefore, it is in
their best interest to provide you with those regulations. Whether the
mistake is yours or the contractor's, the government can and will assess
interest, damages, or cancel the contract for non-performance.


Seriously,
you might want to tell your employer to supply you a copy since you and I
both are bound by what it says.

My contractor, not my "employer." There's a difference, but the
difference is a petty detail that you Pentagon lords of the Rings
don't bother with. :-)

In this case, the contractor is acting as your employer. You, as the
sub-contractor have legal obligations to perform to the standards outlined
in the contract.

I'm not worried about the contract administration tasks. So far,
to the best of my observation, no contract regulation has ever
been able to communicate by radio, search for a submarine, or
test out another electronic unit. Maybe you know of some
contract document that has?

Documents no, but a breach of a contract regulation (as designated through
the Contract Officer) can result in the assessment of interest, damages, or
cancellation of the contract for non-performance

I'm sure that you need only imply you always tell the truth
in here and that is the Final Word. :-)

Do you know what COTS is? Ask around. Don't sleep on the job.

COTS = Commercial Off The Shelf.

I'm quite familiar with the term COTS. I didn't respond because it was a
moronic question to ask someone who works in the system.

Riiiight. And all the contract administrators can "work on the board,"
do the designs, get their hands dirty in the labs, monitor the
environmental testing, troubleshoot failures, and, in general, make
the PRODUCT work. Suuuuure.

The term COTR is exactly as it implies. A technical expert. That is why I
administer contracts concerning security issues, and others administer your
contract. I guarantee, the COTR on YOUR contract is an expert in that field
and can perform the technical surveillance as necessary. They probably
already have.


Just who do you think specifies whether or not a commercial, off
the shelf component will WORK in a PRODUCT? Here's a clue,
bionic one, it's NOT the contract administration side of a contract.

The producer of that component MUST certify that is is within contract
specifications. The COTR, a technical expert, will also determine through
surveillance, inspections, or various other means, if the component meets
the technical specifications of the contract. It's a check and balance
system to insure the product works as promised.


"Millions" in contract awards have been awarded since WW2. The
dollar amounts, normalized for the COLA, serve only to indicate the
size of a particular project. That's a manager and bean-counter
thing; us folks with the dirtier hands concentrate on the works of a
project in order to fulfill a contract.

And as the COR, I make sure that you do.

Not HERE, sweetie. Your name on the corporate visitor's list at
the lobby ain't there nor did security ever give you a pass for
visitor access.

It was a rhetorical answer, Leonard. I work as the COTR on a security
contract. In that area, I am the technical expert. Your COTR is also a
technical expert in electronics.

We surveille, inspect, rate, and coordinate
with the contractor concerning every aspect of the contract for the CO.
The
6 million dollar contract (for which I am still the COR) extends over a
period of 2 years. We are only 3 months into it at this point, and have
just completed our first quarterly performance rating for them. They did
quite well.

Okay, I'll have my dentist erect a plaque with your name on it.

It would be fun to have you visit the main plant and watch you
"surveille" the work on the prototypes. I'll bet all your morse code
and amateur experience would make you very knowledgeable
about the work being "surveilled."

I won't be doing that anytime soon, not my contract. But I guarantee that
YOUR COTR has already made such a visit. Known to you or not.

Oh, and leave the weeds at the entrance. There's lots of clean
rooms here and we can't allow dirt or vegetation into them.

New stuff, Leonard. Doesn't even remotely resemble what you did in
1955. I
gave you the web site to research. What, did the BIG words stump you?

"BIG" is also an acronym now? [what will they think of next?]

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious? Antidisestablishmentarianism?

I'm working with HEMT, PHEMT, and GaSP devices. For radio
purposes...and some of that will bleed over to WiFax, one of the
IEEE 802 standard systems for broadband (it ain't "Wi-Fi" but one
of the families within the standard). DoD will own the plans per
terms of the overall contract, but the techniques and notebook
data aren't owned by da gubmint.

I bet you a dollar to a donut that the military specific application of
that
technology is quite proprietary.

"Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" is probably proprietary to Walt
Disney Productions. I don't know the details but the Disney
corporate buildings are at the corner of Verdugo and Buena Vista
in Burbank. "Antidisestablishmentarianism" is free for public
use, in some dictionaries. HEMT, PHEMT, and GaSP are
non-copyrighted process terms in the RF-electronics industry.

I'll meet you at the Krispy Kreme at the Empire Center in Burbank.
You bring the money, I'll bring the appetite.

I didn't say the terms, Leonard, I said the "specific" application of them.
My bet still stands.

--------

Now, how does your "COR" superiorness relate to the NCVEC
petition (RM-10870) and the term "Communicator" class of
amateur radio license? :-)

I am an extra class amatuer radio operator. The changes in the NCVEC,
testing, or any other myriad issues won't effect me in the least. I'll
concentrate on the danger that BPL is posing. The issue of Morse testing is
long since over. Time to move on.

Arnie -




LHA / WMD

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

Isn't it awful? Gosh, he ought to contact the other Steve, Colonel
Austin (the one with the bionic VTC), and, with the aid of a ham
in Iowa, they can straighten all this out to assure their amateur
god-hood.

I just have to laugh. This very same technology that you make fun of (I
presume because you don''t have a clue) is the same technology that might
very well save your butt some day.

Actually, it might. You get all those FAR and DFAR documents
together, epoxy them into nice walls (using COTS epoxy, of course)
and you will create a Maginot-style impregnable fortress to protect
everyone!

Yup, a VTC will allow the participants to TALK terrorists out of
attacking the USA again! Scare them witless with video bytes!
Posture, preen, show them who's Boss! Right on!


The Scotty can send picture, data or both simultaneously. It has a remote
camera capability, which alows us to send real-time data and pictures during
emergencies. Of course, I'm sure you see no importance in that. After all,
who would want that capability in an emergency, right?

Arnie -


------

Now what has your ranting to say about the NCVEC petition
(RM-10870) and their proposed "Communicator" class license?

Hint...that's in the thread title and the subject of the thread
origin...

LHA / WMD

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote ...

Once thought to have Arnie's back against the wall, and therefore MORE than
willing to rant off-topic on his own, Lennie finds himself up against a
formidable and well prepared "opponent" and NOW wants to move back on
target. Uh huh.
__________________________________________________ ___________

Leonard came to my ballpark and wanted to play. The problem he faces is
simple. I am the expert in this particular arena. Unfortunately, he just
doesn't seem to realize that.

Arnie -

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Funny how being there suddenly makes him want to get "on topic", even
though only one day ago he was perfectly happy to ramble on about off-topic
stuff when he thought it was going to make him look "smart".

Steve,

Look at the subject line.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote ...

Look at the subject line.
______________________________________________

I understand that. But isn't it a bit curious that Leonard just "now"
decided to get back on task?

Arnie -

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote ...

Look at the subject line.
______________________________________________

I understand that. But isn't it a bit curious that Leonard just "now"
decided to get back on task?

He never got off, task, Arnie.

Every time you read his posts in this thread, don't you immeidately think:
"Wrong again, Len!"?

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Clarification, was: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/28/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

The rest are your ususal smatterings of rhetorical antagonism,
spiced
with
profanity and "personal perjorative".

Same Putzy Lennie...

Steve, K4YZ

Didn't he help you find a schematic or a manual?

Sure he did. And Hitler got the trains running and revitalized a
devastated economy.

Wow. I think you've just compared Len to Hitler.

Actually, Mussolini promised to "get the trains running on time." :-)

Hitler killed 7 million in concentration camps.

The gunnery nurse got his ego tweaked so everyone that does
that is a "war criminal!" :-)

I thought that wasn't allowed on here?

Oh, wait a sec, two sets of rules.

The set is elastomeric...rubber, stretches to include any sort of
hatred in the heart of hot-dog heavy heurisitic hitters such as the
Doctor Dill Instructor from the "ER." :-)

He's nuts.

LHA / WMD

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote ...

Once thought to have Arnie's back against the wall, and therefore MORE than
willing to rant off-topic on his own, Lennie finds himself up against a
formidable and well prepared "opponent" and NOW wants to move back on
target. Uh huh.
_________________________________________________ ____________

Leonard came to my ballpark and wanted to play. The problem he faces is
simple. I am the expert in this particular arena. Unfortunately, he just
doesn't seem to realize that.

Incorrect. This is not a ballpark, not a government contract discussion
forum, and Macy is vainly trying to exact retribution for perceived
personal affronts long ago in the past. Not only that, he ventures far
from the general subject of this newsgroup which is concerned with
amateur radio policy.

Macy acts the petulant little child, whining and crying because he
is not honored and revered because he exists. Puerile behavior.

He tries to play games. Unfortunately he has struck out. Long ago.

LHA / WMD

Subject: Clarification, was: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/29/2004 7:15 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...

Sure he did. And Hitler got the trains running and revitalized a
devastated economy.

Wow. I think you've just compared Len to Hitler.

I thought that wasn't allowed on here?


Oh, wait a sec, two sets of rules.

Nope. Just one major example that you can take anyone, regardless of how
terrible they may be, and under the right "spin", made to look "acceptable".

I am sure that Lennie doesn't look good in jackboots and swatikas.

Steve, K4YZ

"Len Over 21" wrote ...

Incorrect. This is not a ballpark, not a government contract
discussion
forum, and Macy is vainly trying to exact retribution for perceived
personal affronts long ago in the past. Not only that, he ventures far
from the general subject of this newsgroup which is concerned with
amateur radio policy.

Macy acts the petulant little child, whining and crying because he
is not honored and revered because he exists. Puerile behavior.

He tries to play games. Unfortunately he has struck out. Long ago.

LHA / WMD

__________________________________________________ _________

Being on the losing end of a discussion is a real bitch, ain't it? Well,
get used to it. I will never treat you with kid gloves again. If this is
the best you can do, you might want to consider retiring from RRAP.

Arnie -

"Len Over 21" wrote in part ...

The set is elastomeric...rubber, stretches to include any sort of
hatred in the heart of hot-dog heavy heurisitic hitters such as the
Doctor Dill Instructor from the "ER." :-)
__________________________________________________ _________

Now you have steve training pickles? Who exactly is "Nuts" here again?

Arnie -